The Nepalese are enthusiastic to draft their own constitution through the convening of a Constituent Assembly (CA), an unfulfilled demand for the last six decades. Till September, there was hope that the November elections will take place and the law and order situation will stabilize before then. When the caretaker government reached an agreement with the assertive groups in the Terai, it seemed to have strengthened people's optimism over the elections. However, now that the Maoists have quit the government and declared an anti-election campaign, ambiguity over the elections has come to the fore again.

The Maoists, who have been repeatedly demanding an election of the CA for a couple of years, now consider the CA as a "drama," and an "impossible event." Earlier too, the Maoist leaders used to give such speeches and statements against the election. The Maoists implemented none of the agreements they had signed and even disturbed the verification of the Maoist army, which was to be confined to selected cantonments according to the tripartite agreement with the UN. Indeed, they formed a new youth group, Young Communist League (YCL), to persist with intimidation, through which people became more frightened and terrified. However, until the Maoists decision to disturb the CA election, people gave less priority to those unconvincing speeches with the consideration that elections would take place soon.

The Maoists have repeatedly opposed negotiations and agreements held and signed by the government with the Janajatis and the Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF) (the leading organizer of the Terai unrest). Forgetting their bitter past, the Maoist leaders have refused to hold negotiations with the agitators but suggested that the government use force to control the agitating groups. They even asked permission of the government to use their guerillas to control the Terai unrest.

In the midst of all this, the Maoists initiated "blame politics." Earlier, the Maoists had claimed that the Nepal Congress (NC) and India wanted monarchy and therefore, did not want the CA. When the NC decided to go for a Republic, the Maoist leaders started saying that the decision of the NC for a Republic is not like the Republic the Maoists want but like the "Bihari republic." Again, the Maoists had rarely criticized India after the 12-point understanding. However, they considered it a case of external intervention when Indian Ambassador Shiv Shankar Mukherjee supported the election saying "no pretext is acceptable to postpone the November election." Why? The simple answer was they wanted political uncertainty through which they would expand their role. Even the recent demands to declare the "Republic" before the elections and to "change the head of the caretaker government" forwarded by the Maoists indicate that these are attempts neither towards elections nor for strengthening democracy, but to defer the date of elections and to make Nepal politically more unstable.

If a "Republic" was the demand of the Maoists, they should not be campaigning against the CA when the two largest political parties - the NC and the United Marxist-Lennist (UML) - had agreed to support a Republic. Now, after the decision of NC and UML, abolition of the institution of monarchy at the first meeting of the CA is certain if the elections are held in November. Why therefore, have the Maoists turned against the elections? It is because the Maoists never imagined that the NC and UML would come up with the federal and republican agenda and not allow the Maoists the sole opportunity to capitalize on the radical and republican sentiment of the Nepali people and thus win the election. Now, those hopes are shattered; the NC and UML have come over as radical as the Maoists. The Maoists lost their stronghold further when they used violence against the Madhesi and ethnic activists who were engaged in peaceful protests. They have almost been swept out from the Terai which is where 48 per cent of the constituencies in the CA election are located; they have also lost support from the Janajatis. In the current situation, the Maoists will find it difficult to win through the ballot. It is believed that the Maoists will not be able to even maintain the position which they have in this interim parliament and so have sought the help of the NC and UML to ensure the elections of some Maoist candidates. If the Maoists get positive signals from the NC and UML, they may however, support the elections. Since they are under tremendous national and international pressure, it is speculated that they may, again, try to reschedule the election date from November 6 to some day in April 2008.

Many people argue that postponement of the elections would be another unfortunate disaster for democracy. Others argue that if the CA elections cannot happen in November, it will never happen in Nepali history. If there are no CA elections, only the regressive forces along with traditional monarchist will benefit. Is this an indication given by the Maoists of having another "secret power sharing deal" with the monarchy after sabotaging the November elections? Or, is it an indication that they will go back to the jungle again? Either option would be hard for the Maoists and for the people as well.